If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Trump aide warned 'as many as 1.2 million souls' could be lost

While President Donald Trump played down concerns about the coronavirus in January and February, a top White House adviser warned that a coronavirus pandemic could cost the country trillions of dollars and endanger millions of Americans, according to two new reports.

Peter Navarro, the top trade and manufacturing aide to the president, laid out the warning in two memos - one on Jan. 29 and another on Feb. 23, according to reports from the New York Times and Axios. Trump has repeatedly said that no one could have predicted the coronavirus pandemic.

On Feb. 24, Trump wrote in a tweet: "The Coronavirus is very much under control in the USA."

Despite the warnings from Navarro, Trump in the past several weeks has claimed that "nobody" could have predicted the coronavirus pandemic.

No name calling in this thread, please. Posts must be on topic and not about my person.

"That is the little thing, the small thing, which Trump demands of his followers: To call hot cold. To call black white. To call wrong right." Michael Gerson

No name calling in this thread, please. Posts must be on topic and not about my person.

You left out this part for some strange reason which would explain why what he said wasn't heeded

At the time of Navarro's first memo, aides were skeptical of his motives, Axios reported. Navarro in the past has been hawkish on China

I'm always still in trouble again

"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

You left out this part for some strange reason which would explain why what he said wasn't heeded

At the time of Navarro's first memo, aides were skeptical of his motives, Axios reported. Navarro in the past has been hawkish on China

It would only explain why one would be extra cautious. It would not explain why Trump would pretend there hardly was a problem at all. The fact someone could have a motive to say something does not imply it is not true as the case clearly shows.

"That is the little thing, the small thing, which Trump demands of his followers: To call hot cold. To call black white. To call wrong right." Michael Gerson

“The lack of immune protection or an existing cure or vaccine would leave Americans defenseless in the case of a full-blown coronavirus outbreak on U.S. soil,” Navarro said in the first memo, according to the Times. “This lack of protection elevates the risk of the coronavirus evolving into a full-blown pandemic, imperiling the lives of millions of Americans."

Trump's response:

The same day of Navarro's first memo on Jan. 29, the White House coronavirus task force was formed. Trump announced a day later that he was blocking travel from China.

Second memo (not even sure it was Navarro):

“This is NOT a time for penny-pinching or horse trading on the Hill,” Navarro wrote in the second memo sent on Feb. 23. The memo also warned that an “increasing probability of a full-blown COVID-19 pandemic that could infect as many as 100 million Americans, with a loss of life of as many as 1.2 million souls," according to the Times.
Trump's response:
Worked with congress to pass the Family First act.

So exactly what are you complaining about? Trump listened and took the advice.

Trump saying that nobody could predict this was referring to the pandemic itself. Navarro didn't predict it. It was already happening at the time of his memos. Trump responded quickly and put together a task force. He had it under control as best as anyone could.

It would only explain why one would be extra cautious. It would not explain why Trump would pretend there hardly was a problem at all. The fact someone could have a motive to say something does not imply it is not true as the case clearly shows.

Like typical liberals, you concentrate on what Trump says, not what he does. He was trying to calm the public. They were doing everything they could. And at the time there wasn't a problem. Not until it started spreading in the wild. They thought they had it contained in California and Washington.

Like typical liberals, you concentrate on what Trump says, not what he does. He was trying to calm the public.

I don't think it is unfair to focus on what the most powerful man in the world says. I don't think it is unfair to hold him accountable when he says something that turns out to be completely wrong. I especially don't have a problem with that when he is unwilling to admit his error. Calming the problem is fair if the situation calls for it. If the situation calls for the public to be extra caustious, wash their hands extra carefully and the like, it is not a good idea.

With regard to what he has done, blocking travel from China seems to be what you can point to, or am I wrong? (And yes we have heard that "liberals" foolishly thought that was racist). What else did he do?

Originally Posted by Sparko

They were doing everything they could. And at the time there wasn't a problem. Not until it started spreading in the wild. They thought they had it contained in California and Washington.

If they thought they had it contained what would they base that idea on?

"That is the little thing, the small thing, which Trump demands of his followers: To call hot cold. To call black white. To call wrong right." Michael Gerson

I don't think it is unfair to focus on what the most powerful man in the world says. I don't think it is unfair to hold him accountable when he says something that turns out to be completely wrong. I especially don't have a problem with that when he is unwilling to admit his error. Calming the problem is fair if the situation calls for it. If the situation calls for the public to be extra caustious, wash their hands extra carefully and the like, it is not a good idea.

With regard to what he has done, blocking travel from China seems to be what you can point to, or am I wrong? (And yes we have heard that "liberals" foolishly thought that was racist). What else did he do?

If they thought they had it contained what would they base that idea on?

He did exactly what the memos your OP is referring to said to do. So what is the point of this thread? trolling again?

To repeat:

So let's see.. From the article you linked to.

First memo:

“The lack of immune protection or an existing cure or vaccine would leave Americans defenseless in the case of a full-blown coronavirus outbreak on U.S. soil,” Navarro said in the first memo, according to the Times. “This lack of protection elevates the risk of the coronavirus evolving into a full-blown pandemic, imperiling the lives of millions of Americans."

Trump's response:

The same day of Navarro's first memo on Jan. 29, the White House coronavirus task force was formed. Trump announced a day later that he was blocking travel from China.

Second memo (not even sure it was Navarro):

“This is NOT a time for penny-pinching or horse trading on the Hill,” Navarro wrote in the second memo sent on Feb. 23. The memo also warned that an “increasing probability of a full-blown COVID-19 pandemic that could infect as many as 100 million Americans, with a loss of life of as many as 1.2 million souls," according to the Times.
Trump's response:
Worked with congress to pass the Family First act.

So exactly what are you complaining about? Trump listened and took the advice.

Trump saying that nobody could predict this was referring to the pandemic itself. Navarro didn't predict it. It was already happening at the time of his memos. Trump responded quickly and put together a task force. He had it under control as best as anyone could.